Transcript Discrimination Complaint Log Evaluation Phase I Pir Ahmad

Discrimination Complaint
Log Evaluation
Phase I
Pir Ahmad
USDOL - Civil Rights Center
Scope of Analysis
A Three year longitudinal study
 Purpose: An informational tool to assist
the Civil Rights Center with its compliance
assistance efforts and monitoring
activities. To provide feedback to the
State Workforce Agencies and their
recipients and USDOL-operated Job Corps
Centers.

Scope of Analysis
Examine the complaint activity of
recipients nationwide under Title I WIA,
Wagner-Peyser, Unemployment Insurance,
and against USDOL-operated Job Corps
Centers
 Demographic analysis of the population
filing complaints of discrimination, along
with the bases and issues of complaints

Scope of Analysis
Identifying and examining the complaint
activity related to and from persons with
disabilities
 Conducting process-based evaluations into
the complaint processing procedures
 Developing performance measures
 Trend Analysis

Phase I
Data Submission
I.
–
–
State Workforce Agencies and Their
Recipients
USDOL-operated Job Corps Centers
Complaint Activity
II.
–
–
Complaint Filers
Persons with Disabilities
Phase I
III.
–
–
–
IV.
Complaint Processing Performance
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Complaint Outcomes
Non-jurisdictional Complaints
Recap
Regional Distribution
 Midwest
Region:
Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas,
Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota,
Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Texas
 Southeast
Region:
Alabama, District of Columbia,
Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina,
Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, U.S. Virgin Islands, Virginia,
and West Virginia
 West
Region:
Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado,
Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah,
Washington, and Wyoming
 Northeast
Region:
Connecticut, Delaware, Maine,
Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin
I. Data Submission
A.
State Workforce Agencies and Their
Recipients
B.
USDOL-operated Job Corps Centers
Data Submission

Program Demographic Data
– Challenges encountered: A number of State
Workforce Agencies experienced problems
with aggregation and allocation of multiple
race responses of program participants.
– Data inadequacies: Especially for UI data,
precluded the inclusion of program
demographic data in this phase of the study
State Workforce Agencies – FY03 Complaint Log
Submission
Midwest
Southeast
West
Northeast
Total
Number of
States in
Region
13
14
13
13
53
Number of
States
Submitting
Complaints
10
14
12
8
44
Total,
Complaints
Submitted
397
252
152
80
881
USDOL-operated Job Corps Centers
Midwest Southeast
West
Northeast
U.S.
Totals
Job Corps Centers
22
28
21
24
95
Centers
Submitting
Complaints
11
16
10
13
50
81
110
39
100
330
23,210
29,776
20,427
21,562
94,975
3.49
3.69
1.91
4.64
3.47
Total Complaints
Submitted
Student
Population
Number of
Complaints/1,000
Students
II. Complaint Activity
A.
Complaint Filers
B.
Persons with Disabilities
Complaint Filers
Participant
6%
Non-Customer
7%
Other
1%
Employee
45%
Customer
8%
Applicant
8%
Unknown
8%
Student
16%
Persons with Disabilities
Filed 137 complaints alleging discrimination
 Disabled employees of State Workforce
Agencies accounted for 56% of all disability
complaints
 Disability complaints occurred most often in
the Midwest – accounting for 41%
 Job Corps received only four complaints
alleging discrimination on the bases of
disability

III. Complaint Processing
Performance
A.
Alternative Dispute Resolution
B.
Complaint Outcomes
C.
Non-jurisdictional Complaints
Alternative Dispute Resolution
(ADR)
In FY03 ADR utilization ranged from a low
of 3% of complaints in the Midwest to a
high of 9% in the West.
 57 complaints were resolved utilizing an
ADR process
 ADR participation rates

– WIA participants 13%
– Employees 6%
– Customers 5%
Complaint Outcomes
Region
Midwest
Complaint Disposition
Closures
Findings of Discrimination
Non-jurisdictional
Pending
Midwest Total
Northeast
Closures
Findings of Discrimination
Non-jurisdictional
Pending
Northeast Total
Southeast
Closures
Findings of Discrimination
Non-jurisdictional
Pending
Southeast Total
West
Closures
Findings of Discrimination
Non-jurisdictional
Pending
West Total
Nationwide Closures
Findings of Discrimination
Non-jurisdictional
Pending
Nationwide Total
Number of
Complaints
163
10
288
17
478
134
3
29
14
180
215
18
103
26
362
135
4
33
19
191
647
35
453
76
1,211
Average
Processing
Time (in days)
42
19
8
20
38
11
9
30
43
24
13
30
65
83
17
51
46
28
10
29
Complaint
Disposition
Rate
34%
2%
60%
4%
100%
74%
2%
16%
8%
100%
59%
5%
28%
7%
100%
71%
2%
17%
10%
100%
53%
3%
37%
6%
100%
Non-Jurisdictional Complaints
453 complaints or 37% of all FY03
complaints classified as non-jurisdictional
 Majority filed under the bases of sex, race,
and disability
 Over half of the complaints classified as
non-jurisdictional were filed by employees
 45% of all complaints alleging
discrimination on the bases of disability
were classified as non-jurisdictional

Recap
Nationwide 1,211 complaints alleging
discrimination were filed in FY03
 Employees filed 551 complaints or 45% of
all complaints. On the bases of sex,
predominately female, and race, mostly
Black. 43% of these complaints were
classified as non-jurisdictional.

Recap - continue
Job Corps students filed 190 complaints
alleging discrimination, with 117 or 62%
being filed by female students. The main
issue – harassment, whether sexual or
verbal, or simply living in a hostile
environment.
 Female students were five times as likely
to file a complaint alleging sexual
harassment than their male counterpart.

Recap - continue
Persons with disabilities filed 137
complaints, accounting for 11% of all
complaints filed in FY03.
 Disabled employees of State Workforce
Agencies and their local areas filed 56% of
all disability discrimination complaints.
 Complaint issues – wrongful termination
and failure to provide reasonable
accommodation.

Recap - continue
ADR utilization ranged from a low of 3%
to a high of 9% of all complaints filed in
FY03.
 WIA participants had the highest ADR
participation rates at 13%.
 Complaint Processing Times:

– Average 29 days
Recap

High incidence of classifying discrimination
complaints as non-jurisdictional – 37%
– Midwest Region; 60%

Majority of these complaints were filed by
employees, under the prohibited bases of
sex, race, and disability.